...ad f[estu]m b[eat]i Pet[ri] ad [v]incula prox[imum] post die[m] Lun[ae] iiij p[ost] Pasc[h]a[m]

[Ethan Margolis]

Hello all,
13th-Century English Court-hand:

I have tried every trick I know: Cappelli, "The Record Interpreter," "Manuel de diplomatique," et caetera; however, I am completely stumped here. Most of the entry is quite easy:

"¶ Cir[ographum] sub n[omine] Will[elm]i f[ilii] Will[elm]i de Caston’ et dc[t]i A[brahami] de 2 m. r[eddendis] inde med[ietatem] ad f[estu]m b[eat]i Pet[ri] ad [v]incula prox[imum] post die[m] Lun[ae] ???iiijm??? p[ost] Pasc[h]a[m] anno gr[atia]e 1236..."

The part that has me pulling my hair out is the "iiij" with an "m" above it. My knee-jerk is to take it as 4,000, but that makes no sense. It could also be something like quadriduum, but if that is the case, what does the whole thing mean? "Half to be returned at the feast of Peter next after Monday 4 days after Easter"??? That makes no sense!

If it is any help, festum sancti Petri ad vincula is August 1, and Easter in 1236 was March 23 in the Julian Calendar and March 30 in the Gregorian Calendar.

I suspect that my problem is that I simply do not have any idea how to take the iiijm abbreviation. I cannot tell you how much help it would be if anyone could tell me what is going on here. I started trying to figure this out 3 hours ago, and eventually decided that was a strong indication that I should fold and ask for help : )

Please let me know if you have any questions, or would like me to upload a larger section of the MS. I would be happy to help in any way.
I cannot thank you enough for helping me out with this - there are so few places where someone might know the answer to such an arcane query. I will keep my fingers crossed and start collecting a huge pile of karma for anyone who can crack this one!
Thanks so, so, so much again!

 

[cinefactus]

Are you sure it is an m and not a iij

 

[Ethan Margolis]

Good point! I am definitely not sure at all. I see "xx" written over "iiij" very often to represent 80 (like the French "quatre-vingt"); were you thinking that it might be 3x4 = 12? Right now, the only idea I have is that it could be "quartam." The feast of St. Peter in Chains is 1 August. Easter in 1236 fell on 30 March (in the Gregorian calendar). Also, while “dies Lunae” simply denotes Monday, “luna, -ae” could also be taken to mean “month.” It is thus possible that the phrase could be understood as “...at the feast of the beatified Peter in Chains next, after the day [that is] four months after Easter...” I know that this interpretation is a huge stretch, but it is all that I can think of. Four months after 30 March would take one to 30 July. If the scribe was thinking simply that this was the end of the month (July actually, of course, has 31 days), the next day would then be 1 August.

Please do let me know if you think that the above is just too much of a stretch, and thanks so much!

 

[cinefactus]

Westcott is the expert. The 4th monday after easter sounds promising. I would have thought if it were 4 months after easter they would have dated it from another festival.

 

[cinefactus]

perhaps something like half to be returned at the next Feast of St Peter in Chains (and the other half) at the 4th monday after easter 1236?

 

[Ethan Margolis]

I was considering the same thing, but later in the entry it says that the other half is due at the feast of St. Martin. Though, perhaps I am just not understanding you correctly. In any event, if Westcott is an expert, hopefully he will stumble across this
Also, I just wanted to say that I really, really do appreciate your help - I am sure you know how hard it is to find someone to ask about these things!

 

[Westcott]

I think it is iiij'm, ie quartum/am, in the same way we write 4th, but I don't understand it. One moiety [medietas, half part] is to be paid at St Peter ad Vincula and the other moiety at St Marc'/Mart'[?] following, so I can't see how Easter enters the reckoning. There might be a clue in the third line but I can't really understand that either. "6s 8d whereof is paid ante terminum (before the end (or before the term of payment))". 6s 8d is half a mark, and the total debt is 2 marks. I wonder whether the payments are not two halves of 26s 8d, but four quarters. One quarter, ie a moiety of a mark, at St Peter ad Vincula (although I think dimidia marca would be the usual phraseology in this sense), one quarterium (a quarter of 2 marks) on the Monday after Easter, another half a mark at St Mar', and 6s 8d to be paid before the end (of 12 months).

 

[cinefactus]

I think I am hindering more than helping

 

[Westcott]

Pondering a little further, you would expect the payment dates to be equally spaced, whether there are two or four. I can't find a feast day for St Mark, St Martin or even the Holy Martyrs, at the beginning of February, ie 6 months after St P ad V. All very odd.

 

[Ethan Margolis]

That is a really good point that 6 s. 8 d. is half a Marc - I did not think of that! The math would add up... 1/2 a Marc + 1/4 of the full amount (i.e., 1/2 a Marc) + 1/2 a Marc + 6s 8d (i.e., 1/2 a Marc) = 2 Marcs. I would still feel a little unsure about everything though because (at least within the context of this document) "inde solvuntur" usually has a sense of an amount that was repaid prior to the due date of the final installment from the full amount due (as opposed to in addition to the full amount due). Ehhh, I did not explain that very well, and I hope it makes sense.

I was looking back over this section, and I noticed something else odd that may be another clue. The entry immediately above the one I posted runs as follows:


.p. ¶ Cir[ographum] sub nomi[n]e Hugon[is] de Jor’ de Bructon’ et d[i]c[t]i Abr[ahami] de 2 m. r[eddendis] ad f[estu]m s[an]c[t]i Mart[ini] p[ro]x[imum] diem ven[er]is p[ro]x[imum] p[ost] f[estu]m s[an]c[t]i Mart[ini] anno gr[atia]e 1235. ¶ in[de] solvunt[ur] 10 s. an[te] t[erminu]m et 8 d.

Here again, there is a very strange way of dating the due date! 99.9% of the other entries will have something due simply at the feast/octave/etc. of St. so-and-so. It seems the scribe either 1. started writing one date, changed his mind, and wrote another (while forgetting to cross out the old date), or 2. left out two medietatem's (one for each day a payment was due). There may be another reason that I cannot think of - and that reason may even explain both of these strange entries. I will try me best to remember to let you know if I ever figure it out : )

As a digression, would you happen to know what the ".p." in the left margin means? It is found in every entry that has been partially repaid (i.e., every entry with "inde solvuntur... ante terminum"), and is thus probably something like "pars"; however, I was not sure if this was a common abbreviation that is usually extended a certain way.

Lastly, as I mentioned to Cinefactus, this board and the time you have taken to answer my questions have been an enormous help, and I cannot thank you both enough!

 

[Westcott]

1) In both these entries the word "post" seems a bit out of place. Why would you specify a precise date for payment and then say that actually it can be paid at some unspecified time afterwards?
2) I agree that inde solvuntur means that the 6s 8d has been paid, not that it will be paid.
3) I have been working on a will today which uses iiii'te for im[media]te. I wonder whether the iiii'm here means im[mediati]m. I don't know whether such a word is attested anywhere but it seems plausible to me. Not that it helps with the interpretation.
4) I don't think you can rely on what this clerk writes. He has written Pasca without the contraction mark that would indicate Pascam. He has also written festum proximo sequens instead of proximum or proxime.